[Advaita-l] THESE ARE MY QUESTIONS TO DVAITA PHILOSOPHY OF MADHVACHARYA..

[Srivathsa Rao]

KK CHAKRAVARTHY SIR,
 LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST.......DVAITHA IS FIT TO SAY ONLY THAT THERE IS
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ,BOOK AND PENCIL,MALE AND FEMALE ETC....WHICH EVEN A
CHILD CAN UNDERSTAND,WHICH I SAY AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH....BUT ADVAITA SAYS IT
AS VYAVAHARIKA SATHYA,IT TALK  ABOUT SAT-CHIT-ANANDA WHICH IS TOTALLY OUT
OF DVAITA'S SCOPE....THAT IS WHY I CALL DVAITA CHILDISH.....

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Srivathsa Rao <vathsa108 at gmail.com> wrote:

> As KK Chakravarthy Sir Requested I am sending his comments For this Post
> Along with my Answers.....
>
> Sir's Reply.........
> Respected Sirs,
>
> I have seen a message on Sri Anandatirtha's dvaita philosophy in the
> advaita list and want to share a few thoughts. I am forwarding this to Shri
> Jaldhar Vyas also, since he is one of the moderators of the list. He is
> free to post this on advaita list, if he wants to.
>
> Pardon me if you do not want personal e-mails from me in your mailbox.
> Please mention if this is the case and I will not send any personal mails
> to you again.
>
> =========================================================================
>
> I am not arguing here from a dvaita viewpoint, but I am arguing here from
> a purely common-sensical view point.
>
> 1) I have a question about madwa philosophy 1) for madwas there are 5
>> bedas *)jada-jada *)jiva -jiva *)jiva-iswara *)jiswara-jada and jiva-jada
>> —————————————
>>
>
> These 5 bhedas are based on sound commonsense. And all these 5 bhedas are
> accepted by advaita at the vyavaharika level. Please ask learned advaitins
> in your list if you are looking for confirmation.
>
> … BUT TODAYS SCIENCE HAVE PROVED THAT THERE IS NO JADA-JADA BEDA…..i:e
>> according to madhvaacharya ,gold can never become silver….but todays
>> science have proved that by changing electronics configuration we can
>> change gold to silver….WHICH ACCORDING TO MADHVAACHARYA IMPOSSIBLE
>> !!!!!!!…because nothing,or jada loose their prakruthika guna according to
>> madhvacharya,….
>>
>
> If there is no jaDa-jaDa bheda, then instead of having rice or wheat, why
> don't we start eating pens and pencils? There is jaDa-jaDa bheda and that
> is why we are not eating pens and pencils. Sorry, I do not mean any
> disrespect here.
>
> If there is no difference between gold and silver, then people should
> start exchanging their gold for silver, or even iron. No sensible person
> would do this for gold is highly priced compared to silver or iron.
>
> Even if you look at elementary particles, a proton is not the same as an
> electron and both are different from a photon. This kind of bheda exists
> even at elementary level. I am talking about this since you have spoken of
> Science. From a chemistry perspective, sodium has very different properties
> compared to Neon and water has different properties compared to Hydrogen,
> even though Hydrogen is one of the constituents of water. When we see these
> differences, why not accept them?
>
>
>> 2)jiva-jiva beda: accoring to dvaita each jiva is suguna and his
>> prakrutika gunas are his own gunas. BUT ACCORDING TO ME PRAKRUTHIKA GUNAS
>> ARE NOT OF ATHMAS AND IS SUPER IMPOSED ON ATHMA,BY READING MY FOLLOWING
>> COMMENTS U PEOPLE COME TO KNOW…….. 1)me myself, i am human i see another
>> human in kama,but if i become dog in next janma,i see dog with kama…..so
>> prakruthika guna kama is not atmans guna 2) bhudhi: now when we are human
>> we have high level of bhudhi,but if i become dog in next janma we have
>> bhudhi of the level of dog,so budhi is not atmas guna if u go on thinking
>> like that u will come to know that ,these gunas atman got from MAYA of
>> jagath..and is not atmans guna ….so atman is nirgua and jagath is
>> maya…………so madwaacharya’s jath is truth and 5 bedas are false……. CAN YOU
>> PEOPLE PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION?
>>
>
> I have answered your question about jIva-jIva bheda at a different place
> below, where it is more appropriate. I will focus on the reality of jagat
> here.
>
> If jagat is not real, how come we are experiencing something instead of
> nothing? Our experience cannot be denied, even if you want to deny the
> existence of the objective world. If you consider the rope and snake
> example, somebody mistakes the rope for a snake. The snake is unreal, but
> this mistake that somebody makes is real.
>
> And why do we see so many differences in the world? A pen is not same as a
> pencil and both are different from a book. Therefore, commonsense suggests
> that there is an external world that we are perceiving and this external
> world is full of differences. Sri Anandatirtha's pancha bhedas and
> jagat-satya vAda are based on sound commonsense.
>
>
>> 2)ultimate knowledge is sacchidaanada. sacchidaananda is the
>> personality(swarupa) of brahman….which means ….. sat(always
>> present)….chit(consiousness)……anadnda(bliss) …..when you experience…..this
>> ananda(bliss)…….that means your personality have become equal to
>> sacchidaanada….in that state you have become sacchidaanada swarupi…..or in
>> other words…..you have become sacchidaanada rupi brahman …..which is the
>> ultimate knowledge….as vedas says….. so….you yourself…..have become
>> sacchidaanada….or YOU HAVE BECOME BRAHMAN ,which is ultimate
>> knowledge….thats why vedas say…..prajgnam brahm….or brahman is
>> knowledge…..and you are brahman…….(aham brahmamaasmi)……this is in
>> breaf……the essence of jgnana yoga…. WHAT YOU SAY FOR THIS?
>>
>
> For argument sake, let us say that brahman is sat-chit-Ananda in essence
> and even a jIva is sat-chit-Ananda in essence. But jIva does not become
> brahman even if they are same in terms of essence. Both ocean and a small
> drop of water, are water in essence, but a small drop of water does not
> become the ocean.
>
>
>
>> 3) Athman is nirvikaara or nirvikaari….in dvaita If you accept this
>> athman as nirvikaari ,then you should accept athman is not atomic and it is
>> infinite or brahman…why because ,now one soul which is human,in this
>> janma,if he become elephant in next janma,will his soul stretches to the
>> size of elephant? similarly if that soul become ant in next janma,will its
>> soul will compress to the size of ant?….. Similarly,in same janma baby will
>> grow from the small size baby to big man,if size changes…then soul cannot
>> be called as nirvikaari or avikaari….. for that purpose,advaita adviceses
>> that athman is infinite in size,or covers whole world or athman is
>> brahman…only because of ignorance…it thinks that it is limited in
>> size……….what you say for this sir?
>>
>
> Maya or no Maya, avidya or no avidya, how can the infinite, which is of
> the nature of Ananda, ever think that it is the finite? It is a common
> experience for most of us that we undergo states like happiness and misery.
> How can the infinite, which is of the nature of Ananda, ever undergo
> misery? It goes against the very idea of Ananda, if an entity which is
> blissful by nature can undergo misery. Again, I am talking only from
> commonsensical perspective.
>
>
>> 4) Sir, In dvaita’s trividha jeevas…like rajasa,tamasa,and sathvika
>> jeevas are like tv serials….where there will be a good person…who will
>> always think good and do good , there will be a bad person…who always think
>> evil and do evil….this is just the ladys watching tv serial story….hence
>> not practical….. 2)In reality there is atleast a good guna in a bad person
>> and a bad guna in a very good person….a evil person can become good one day
>> and good person can become bad one day…..So, we cannot say evil nature or
>> good nature are nature of his own soul…..So,there cannot be rajasa,sathvika
>> ,tamasa jeevas….. WHAT YOU SAY FOR THIS?
>>
>
> Let us think about this from a commonsense perspective again. Experience
> shows that some people are good, some are bad, and many have both qualities
> in them. People like Hitler and Stalin are pure evil. People like Mahatma
> Gandhi and Martin Luther King are just too good. Most people are somewhere
> in the middle. Sri Anandatirtha extends these commonsensical concepts to
> the jIvas themselves. This has scriptural basis in the Bhagavad Gita, but
> even if you leave aside scripture, this is a very commonsensical position
> to take and it is based on experience.
>
>
>
>> 5) First of all ,In advaita we say shivoham,not as “Parvathi pathi”….we
>> say shiva shivoham here shiva means supreme knowledge or supreme
>> consciousnesses….that is it……..that means we are supreme consioussness…not
>> parvathi’s husband In dvaita hari means “lakshmi ‘s husband,shiva means
>> “parvathi’s husband”…..this is childish…..and bakwas If you ask a
>> donkey…how is god…it says god is beautiful donkey …similarly madhvacharya
>> says hari as a beautiful sarvothama lakshmi ‘s husband hari…… Dvaita is
>> full of childish stories.. Please answer for this…..
>>
>
> I do not know whether animals have the capacity to think about concepts
> like god. And as far as "childish stories" are concerned, advaita accepts
> all these stories at the vyavaharika level. Vishnu is accepted as
> Lakshmipati and Shiva is accepted as Parvatipati. Your own Sringeri
> Acharyas perform worship in temples. There are so many Shankar mutts out
> there, where rituals are performed for installed deities. So why are you
> attacking dvaita for this, when advaitins and smartas believe in the same
> scriptures that dvaita does?
>
>
> With Warm Regards
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> My reply for this :
>
> kk chakravarthy Sir,
>
> 1)I accept you advaita says beda is there in vyvaharika level......
>
> But my question is beda in dvaita is absolute.....there is beda between
> gold and silver by absolute according to dvaita.....
>
> beda is absolute means gold by any chance should never become silver or
> any other thing...which is false I am saying...as gold can be converted to
> silver....
>
> 2)In jiva-jiva beda and jada-jada beda what ,I was going to tell is
> In dvaita jiva-jiva beda and jada-jada beda are absolute....so jiva or
> jada will never change their prakruthika guna.....even advaita accepts
> these jiva-jiva and jada -jada beda ,but as temperory as they changes with
> time.....
>
> As time passes as jada or jiva changes its prakruthika guna...So,dvaita
> has to add nanu-nanu beda or  "I" -"I" beda as our prakruthika gunas
> changes with time,"I" changes from time to time.....
>
>
>
>
> 3)Advaita says jiva-jiva beda or jada-jada beda as vyvaharika or temperary
> as prakruthika guna changes with time...so prakruthika gunas are not
> athman's guna as it changes with time and athman is nirguna....
>
>
>
> 4)I said in dvaita ,hari means lakshmi's husbend...,personal god with four
> hands...
>
> that is why they say hari SARVOTTAMA....
>
> SIMILARLY IN DVAITA SHIVA IS A HUMAN ,PARVATHI'S HUSBEND THAT IS WHY THERE
> IS MELU-KILU IN DVAITA...and shivas position is 5 in melu -kilu....
>
>
> but in advaita shiva means supreme consciousnesses ,PURUSHA,ALL DRIVING
> POWER....
> IF YOU CONSIDER GOD AS ALL DRIVING POWER....THEN THERE CANNOT BE MELU-KILU
> AS A POWER CANNOT BE TERMED AS HEIGHER OR LOWER....
>
> BUT FOR MADHVAS HARI IS LAKSHMI'S HUSBEND,SIVA IS PARVATHI'S HUSBEND...A
> PERSONAL GOD....
> WHICH IS CHILDISH ....
>
> THAT IS WHY THERE IS MELU-KILU IN DVAITA...
> THIS IS MY OPINION.....
> 5) LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST.......DVAITHA IS FIT TO SAY ONLY THAT THERE IS
> DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ,BOOK AND PENCIL,MALE AND FEMALE ETC....WHICH EVEN A
> CHILD CAN UNDERSTAND,WHICH I SAY AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH....BUT ADVAITA SAYS IT
> AS VYAVAHARIKA SATHYA,IT TALK  ABOUT SAT-CHIT-ANANDA WHICH IS TOTALLY OUT
> OF DVAITA'S SCOPE....THAT IS WHY I CALL DVAITA CHILDISH.....
>
> PLEASE ANSWER FOR THIS ALSO....
>
>